Podcast #128: We chat with Kent C Dodds about why he loves React and discuss what life was like in the dark days before Git. Listen now.
3 added 33 characters in body
source | link

The majority of phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. their mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person.

You could also argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but since the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. Since (Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.

Therefor I think in most cases a phone-number should be considered personal data. So always handling phone numbers as personal data seems the wise thing to do, unless you are 100% sure that you are only processing phone-numbers of public organizations for example)

Phone numbers can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data collection or processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo-locations) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) are known sell this data as well.

Therefor I think in most cases a phone-number should be considered personal data. So always handling phone numbers as personal data seems the wise thing to do, unless you are 100% sure that you are only processing phone-numbers of public organizations for example.

The majority phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. their mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person.

You could argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.

Therefor I think in most cases a phone-number should be considered personal data. So always handling phone numbers as personal data seems the wise thing to do, unless you are 100% sure that you are only processing phone-numbers of public organizations for example

Phone numbers can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data collection or processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) sell this data.

The majority of phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. their mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person.

You could also argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but since the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. (Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.)

Phone numbers can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo-locations) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) are known sell this data as well.

Therefor I think in most cases a phone-number should be considered personal data. So always handling phone numbers as personal data seems the wise thing to do, unless you are 100% sure that you are only processing phone-numbers of public organizations for example.

2 deleted 16 characters in body
source | link

... an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number ...

https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/

MostThe majority phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. their mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person. 

You could argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.

Therefor I think in most common cases a phone-number should be considered PIIpersonal data. So always handling phone numbers as personal data seems the wise thing to do, unless you are 100% sure that you are only processing phone-numbers of public organizations for example

ItPhone numbers can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data collection or processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) sell this data.

... an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number ...

https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/

Most phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person. You could argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.

Therefor I think in most common cases a phone-number should be considered PII.

It can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data collection or processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) sell this data.

The majority phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. their mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person. 

You could argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.

Therefor I think in most cases a phone-number should be considered personal data. So always handling phone numbers as personal data seems the wise thing to do, unless you are 100% sure that you are only processing phone-numbers of public organizations for example

Phone numbers can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data collection or processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) sell this data.

1
source | link

... an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number ...

https://gdpr-info.eu/art-4-gdpr/

Most phone-numbers are linked to unique persons (e.g. mobile, desk or home), making a phone-number a unique identifier number pointing to a single person. You could argue that some phone-numbers are obviously not coupled to a person, but the percentage of numbers that do largely outnumber the numbers that don't. Since 2005 fixed phone-lines are on the decline and mobile-phone usage is on the rise, with currently 67% of the world population having a mobile-phone number.

Therefor I think in most common cases a phone-number should be considered PII.

It can clearly be used to re-identify a person in a later stage of data collection or processing. If you enrich it with enough other data (e.g. subscriptions, website visits, geo) you could possibly even identify the natural person. Some companies link phone-numbers to online advertisement-cookie-ids leading to very rich profiles. Online services (for example movie ticket buying service) sell this data.